The Academy Award- nominated documentary “Restrepo” is on the frontline of our thinking about Afghanistan. There will be a showing of it on June 20 at 7:30 at WHAT theater as part of Wellfleet Library’s “One Book, One Community” series.
I spent some time looking up reviews online and was surprised to discover that there is a lot of disagreement about something so basic as whether the influential film is for or against the war it depicts. Some reviewers assume that because the life of the young fighters depicted is dangerous and stressful (and because the solders themselves don’t seem all that inspired about the cause) it must be anti-war. I certainly wouldn’t think of it as an advertisement for enlistment.
But others characterize it as pro-war. The sympathy evoked for those young people stuck in such difficult circumstances (in danger themselves and dealing with the moral difficulties of civilian casualties) leads some viewers to the conclusion that those poor kids need all the support we can give them.
The film makes a good Rorshach for feelings about the war because, as most reviewers point out , it is not obvious propaganda one way or the other. In fact the film’s directors (Sebastian Junger and Tim Hetherington) claim that “It’s a completely apolitical film. We wanted to give viewers the experience of being in combat with soldiers. . . regardless of one’s political beliefs. Beliefs can be a way to avoid looking at reality. This is reality.”
Junger talks about the film’s technique as one of simple “immersion” in the “reality” of troops’ lives, as if that immersion goes deeper than “beliefs” or any debate about the virtue of the war. As if the meaning of the “reality” to the fighter or to an observer can exist separate from the meaning of the war itself.
One of the more confused parts of our morally confused culture right now is the contradiction between our determination to “support the troops” and the polls showing that a strong majority of us—59-37 % in a recent one—are against the war in Afghanistan. That is, against the work that troops do.
We may want Obama to end our involvement, but are determined to celebrate returnees, alive, maimed, or dead, as heroes. You read a lot about the war’s ongoing effects on participants such as PTSD.
What you don’t hear about is an organized movement to dissuade would-be enlistees from choosing a job of such dubious value which nonetheless can wreak such havoc on their lives. The basic pitch of such a movement would be: You—young man, young woman—you may need what seems likes a decent job in this down economy. But think again. This is not work most of your fellow citizens want done. Your choice to join this war better be based on strong feelings of its moral and practical value.
You may even feel you have the makings of a hero. But such an aspiration is misled. You can’t be a hero, at least a World War Two-type hero, in an Afghanistan-type war.
Once a young person has signed up and is there on the ground, stuck in the situations shown in “Restrepo,” it’s hard not to give them our sympathy and support, even if we have grave doubts about what they are doing. We need to get to them earlier, before they get there.
The lopsided anti-war polls suggest that there are parents who could use help in dissuading their kids from this particular career choice and saving the family from tragic conflict.
What our country needs is a resolution to our Afghanistan contradictions and “Restrepo” doesn’t help much in that. In its purported separation of the war’s “reality” and “beliefs” it seems more part of the problem than part of the solution.
We can and ought to put pressure on our young guns for hire who, along with the politicians, are enabling this unpopular war.
No Comments